Posted on 05/14/2007 8:16:26 AM PDT by tranzorZ
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — At first, Sarah Barg thought the e-mail was a scam.
Some group called the Recording Industry Association of America was accusing the University of Nebraska-Lincoln sophomore of illegally downloading 381 songs using the school's computer network and a program called Ares.
The letter said she might be sued but offered her the chance to settle out of court.
Barg couldn't imagine anyone expected her to pay $3,000 — $7.87 per song — for some 1980s ballads and Spice Girls tunes she downloaded for laughs in her dorm room. Besides, the 20-year-old had friends who had downloaded thousands of songs without repercussion.
(Excerpt) Read more at music.yahoo.com ...
And what tactics should they use to combat theft?
Current copyright law is evidence of corruption in Congress, but 20 year old songs would probably be covered even under a reasonable standard.
So how come we can enforce music downloading laws, but we can’t do anything about illegal aliens? Maybe we should put the RIAA on the border.
Sure they do. She admitted she had no use rights.
‘”Obviously I knew it was illegal, but no one got in trouble for it,” Barg said.’
It's a little different, actually. Wait, it's a lot different.
If one was to steal a gallon of milk, it would deprive the owner of the mini-mart actual merchandise (which he would otherwise sell and profit on). The gallon of milk exists in the physical world.
If someone downloaded a song and then it disappeared forever from the record company's archive, I would agree with this parallel.
Like the saying goes, it's a brave new world. Pirating an infinitely duplicatable medium cannot be compared effectively with shoplifting and strong-arm theft, as they are not congruent.
The RIAA is using the court system as its own organized extortion scheme. It’s nothing more; nothing less.
If she had shoplifted 40 Cds, I think a $3000 fine would be appropriate.
Theft is theft, and just because “everyone does it” does not change reality.
She admitted it after the fact, they have no idea when they claim You downloaded a song illegally of knowing if you own that song or not legally.
From what I've read, even that is supposedly illegal.
No, the law allows you to make 1 copy for your own personal use. Any more then it becomes pirating.
It probably is.... but you know... if I buy a CD at bestbuy... rip it to mp3 and put it on my mp3 player. Then listen to it on the plane while I travel, or listen to it while I mow the yard.... 2 things are true. 1) they aren’t going to ever know. 2) I’m not the guy they are really looking for who is hurting their sales.
“She admitted it after the fact”
So what?
“they have no idea when they claim You downloaded a song illegally of knowing if you own that song or not legally.”
When you show proof of your use rights I guess they will know you have a legal right.
This assumes guilt from the get go, entire presumption of innocence is out the door, which is exactly where the RIAA and the MPAA both are at.
I know I get some letter from someone saying pay me, I’ll tell em to get bent. They want to sue me in civil court, I’ll countersue for harrassment. Of course this is why they pick on 20somethings with no resources or knowledge of the law instead of adults who would take them to the cleaners.
Ask JimRob about copyright laws. If the owner of a copyrighted article asks you to cease and desist, you are legally required to do so, or you could be paying damages to the owner.
I just had a converation about this yesterday. What about books? If I buy a book an give it to a friend have I violated the law? After all, this all about royalties, isn’t it? And what about libraries?
No, the issue with JIMROB was what is FAIR USE and PUBLIC DOMAIN... there is no debate if I own a song in my music collection, I can go download MP3 copies for myself from where I choose to, and I have violated absolutely no copyright law.
The presumption by the RIAA is if you download a song over a file sharing network, you have zero right to that song, which they have no idea if that is the case. They PRESUME you have don’t have right to use it, but based simply on the fact their tracking software caught you downloading it, doesn’t mean you violated any law by downloading it.
Where is “on the web”?
If your car is stolen, should you be arrested for putting your car where it might be stolen?
I have been making this argument for years to anyone who can stand to listen to me rail on and on about it.
When I purchased Beggars Banquet decades ago on what is now unplayable vinyl, did I not acquire a lifetime’s license to listen to those songs without paying another dime? Can you pirate something if you’ve already purchased the license?
Yes, that seems to me a valid assumption. If I am the rights holder and I see a down load with no corresponding payment I don’t know why I should assume it isn’t stolen. I may send a bill or I may ask to see your proof of use.
The way I understand the law, if you buy the CD, you can make one copy of that CD for your personal use. If you say; “Hey I bought Aerosmith’s Toys in the Attic in 1989 on CD so now I can download “Sweet Emotion” any time I want as many times as I want in perpetuity.” I would say you don’t have the law on your side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.